Development of a diet quality index to assess adherence to Canadian dietary recommendations in 3-year-old children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Little is known about the diet quality of preschool children in Canada. We adapted an established diet quality index for European preschool children to align with the Canadian context and applied the index to dietary data of 3-year-old children to assess patterns of diet quality. DESIGN: Our diet quality index (DQI-C) consists of four components that align with Canada's Food Guide (Vegetables and Fruit, Grain Products, Milk and Alternatives and Meat and Alternatives) and two components that account for less healthy intakes (Candy/Snacks, and Sugar-Sweetened Beverages (SSB)). The ratio between consumption v. recommended intakes is calculated for each component and summed to give a total score from 0 to 6. SETTING: Alberta, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: The DQI-C was applied to FFQ data from 1260 3-year-old children. RESULTS: Mean DQI-C was 3·69 (sd 0·6). Most children met recommendations for Vegetables and Fruit (73 %) and Meat and Alternatives (70 %); however, fewer met recommendations for Milk and Alternatives (38 %) and Grain Products (13 %). Children in the lowest quartile for DQI-C score consumed a mean of 82 g of Candy/Snacks and 193 g of SSB daily, whereas those in the highest quartile consumed 45 g/d and 17 g/d of Candy and Snacks and SSB, respectively. CONCLUSION: This DQI-C score is useful for ranking Canadian preschool children according to their overall diet quality. There is room for improvement for consumptions of Grain Products, Meat and Alternatives, Candy/Snacks and SSB, which could be a target for initiatives to improve diet quality of preschool children in Canada.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".